evelsteve

Actually, Kant poses that there exists, a "noumena" other than phenomena. "Reality" can either be the emipirical/phenomenal world, or the non-emprical (other than our mind states) noumenal world, or they could be both. The noumena may somehow house or eminate the "manifold" that is in our minds in order to perceive empirical space and time. Kant points out that we can simulataneously view both the empirical reality of space (qualities,quantity,etc.) as well as the transcendental ideality (the fact that space applies to every empirical object in the universe). As far as a "whole" or one whole (as in reality being bound in time and space), Kant posits that we cannot succesfully conceive of the whole, or entire entity of time, or space (Kant calls space the void, and time infinite time), because it is supposed to be infinite as, in never-ending and formless. I can show you the finite shape or form of an object, wether felt, heard, felt, tasted, or shown, but I cannot succefully show you the "shape" or "form" of either space or time itself, only the objects and events that reside within them. Kant points out that we dream, yet dreams are not empirically spatial. We can only say, I had a dream at such and such a time, yet we cannot go there, as in going to an actual physical place, so dreams are only temproal. Yet, dreams are still part of "reality." The same applies for time and space. Kant does not explicitly say this, but I think he would agree, that if the universe existed and absoultely nothing would move or change, we would say,reality is only spatial. But since observable objects do actually move or change (even our dreams and emotions) "time," as a mental construct, seems to be a human mechanism granted to us in order to make sense of temporal events, since time only moves foward (never backward) in linear pattern.